Radiation therapy has become a significant and highly successful process for treating prostate cancer, lung cancer, brain cancer and many other types of localized cancers. Radiation therapy procedures generally involve (a) planning processes to determine the parameters of the radiation (e.g., dose, shape, etc.), (b) patient setup processes to position the target at a desired location relative to the radiation beam, (c) radiation sessions to irradiate the cancer, and (d) verification processes to assess the efficacy of the radiation sessions. Many radiation therapy procedures require several radiation sessions (i.e., radiation fractions) over a period of approximately 5-45 days.
To improve the treatment of localized cancers with radiotherapy, it is generally desirable to increase the radiation dose because higher doses are more effective at destroying most cancers. Increasing the radiation dose, however, also increases the potential for complications to healthy tissues. The efficacy of radiation therapy accordingly depends on both the total dose of radiation delivered to the tumor and the dose of radiation delivered to normal tissue adjacent to the tumor. To protect the normal tissue adjacent to the tumor, the radiation should be prescribed to a tight treatment margin around the target such that only a small volume of healthy tissue is irradiated. For example, the treatment margin for prostate cancer should be selected to avoid irradiating rectal, bladder and bulbar urethral tissues. Similarly, the treatment margin for lung cancer should be selected to avoid irradiating healthy lung tissue or other tissue. Therefore, it is not only desirable to increase the radiation dose delivered to the tumor, but it also desirable to mitigate irradiating healthy tissue.
One difficulty of radiation therapy is that the target often moves within the patient either during or between radiation sessions. For example, tumors in the lungs move during radiation sessions because of respiration motion and cardiac functions (e.g., heartbeats and vasculature constriction/expansion). To compensate for such movement, the treatment margins are generally larger than desired so that the tumor does not move out of the treatment volume. However, this is not a desirable solution because the larger treatment margins may irradiate a larger volume of normal tissue.
Localization and/or tracking of markers, such as gold fiducials or electromagnetic transponders, may enable increased tumor radiation and decreased healthy tissue irradiation. However, localization of implanted gold fiducials is limited by high doses of non-therapeutic imaging radiation, expensive fluoroscopic equipment, subjective image interpretation and poor implant stability.
Another challenge in radiation therapy is accurately aligning the tumor with the radiation beam. Current setup procedures generally align external reference markings on the patient with visual alignment guides for the radiation delivery device. For an example, a tumor is first identified within the patient using an imaging system (e.g., X-ray, computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or ultrasound system). The approximate location of the tumor relative to two or more alignment points on the exterior of the patient is then determined. During setup, the external marks are aligned with a reference frame of the radiation delivery device to position the treatment target within the patient at the beam isocenter of the radiation beam (also referenced herein as the machine isocenter). Conventional setup procedures using external marks are generally inadequate because the target may move relative to the external marks between the patient planning procedure and the treatment session and/or during the treatment session. As such, the target may be offset from the machine isocenter even when the external marks are at their predetermined locations for positioning the target at the machine isocenter. Reducing or eliminating such an offset is desirable because any initial misalignment between the target and the radiation beam will likely cause normal tissue to be irradiated. Moreover, if the target moves during treatment because of respiration, organ filling, or cardiac conditions, any initial misalignment will likely further exacerbate irradiation of normal tissue. Thus, the day-by-day and moment-by-moment changes in target motion have posed significant challenges for increasing the radiation dose applied to patients.
Conventional setup and treatment procedures using external marks also require a direct line-of-sight between the marks and a detector. This requirement renders these systems useless for implanted markers or markers that are otherwise in the patient (i.e., out of the line-of-sight of the detector and/or the light source). Thus, conventional optical tracking systems have many restrictions that limit their utility in medical applications. Thus, there is a continuing need for improved localization and tracking of markers, including an improved method of placing the marker and an improved system of preventing movement of the marker once placed.
Tumor target localization has been demonstrated utilizing implanted markers such as gold fiducials (balls and cylinders) and electromagnetic transponders. One method of placement for these markers in the lung is to deliver them into the bronchus/bronchioles of the lung and then force-fit the markers into the appropriate diameter bronchiole near the treatment target location. The implant location that permits a force-fit of the markers is likely not the most desired location, but one that simply accommodates the force fit. Additionally, the act of breathing, which effects a small enlargement/contraction cycle of the bronchioles, may dislodge the marker from its desired location. Many inhaled drugs also effect changes in the diameter of the bronchioles. Further, actions such as coughing, which typically originate in the alveolar structures near the lung periphery, serve to force the markers from their desired locations to locations closer to the trachea.
Thus implanted marker usage for localization and tracking of lung tissue targets has proven challenging due to marker migration issues. Since markers are surrogates for the actual treatment target position, there is a need to minimize potential for marker migration throughout the entire course of radiation therapy (from treatment planning to last radiation fraction application). Initial positioning and maintenance of marker location should desirably be accomplished independent of bronchus/bronchiole size. The position of the marker needs to remain stationary regardless of feature changes within the bronchioles. A multiplicity of devices, methods, and systems are listed to accomplish that task.
The airways in the lungs anatomically constitute an extensive network of conduits that reach all lung areas and lung tissues. Air enters the airways through the nose or mouth, travels through the trachea and into the bronchi and bronchioli of the lunch. The lungs are covered by a think membrane called the pleura. Because of these physiological characteristics of the airways, a marker placed in bronchi and bronchioli may cause pneumothorax when implanted, thus, there is a need for a new and improved device, system, and method for implanting a marker in the region proximate to a tumor or other lesion in the lung.
One recent method for locating a target implanted within the body includes a wireless implantable marker configured to be implanted surgically or percutaneously into a human body relative to a target location. The markers include a casing and a signal element in the casing that wirelessly transmits location signals in response to an excitation energy. One concern of using implanted markers in soft tissues, bronchi or bronchioli is that the markers may move within the patient after implantation. To resolve this concern, Calypso Medical Technologies, Inc. previously developed several anchors and fasteners for securing the markers to soft tissue structures, as disclosed in U.S. application Ser. No. 10/438,550, which is incorporated herein by reference. Although these anchors may work for percutaneous or surgical implantation, they may be improved for bronchoscopic applications. Therefore, it would be desirable to further develop markers for bronchoscopic deployment and implantation.